|
Date of decision
|
09 January 2007
|
|
|
Case number
|
T 0386/04
- 3.2.03
|
|
|
Application number
|
97100051.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Title of the application
|
Hydraulic drive system for construction machines
|
|
|
Applicant name
|
HITACHI CONSTRUCTION MACHINERY CO.,LTD.
|
|
|
Opponent name
|
LINDE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
|
|
Headnote
An appellant-proprietor, whose patent has been revoked, is
entitled to seek maintenance of the patent as granted even
though its main request before the opposition division had
only been the maintenance of the patent in more limited form.
The exception to this is where to allow the proprietor to
revert to the amended claims would amount to an abuse of
procedure. This long-standing principle is not contradicted
by decisions T 528/93 or T 840/93, which are concerned with
new claims raising new issues, and is not contrary to the
statement by the Enlarged Board of Appeal in decision G 9/91
concerning the purpose of an appeal.
Observed: In this context, there is no procedural logic in
distinguishing between cases in which the patent has been
revoked and cases in which the patent has been maintained.
|
|
|
Keywords
Admissibility of main request (yes)
Novelty (yes)
Inventive step (yes)
|
|
|
|
|